Compassionate Appointment Must Match Candidate's Qualification If Eligible: Andhra Pradesh High Court
Saahas Arora
24 March 2026 2:35 PM IST
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has allowed a petition filed by an Attender of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Proddatur, who sought appointment as a Junior Assistant under the compassionate appointment scheme, commensurate with his educational qualifications.
The petitioner was appointed in 2004 as an Attender on compassionate grounds, following the demise of his father, who was also employed in the judicial department. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted a representation seeking appointment to the post of Junior Assistant, contending that he possessed the requisite educational qualification for the post.
Upon failure of the authorities to consider his request, the petitioner approached the High Court, which had directed the District Judge, Kadapa, to pass appropriate orders. However, the District Judge, in 2011, rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the subsequent promotion of the petitioner would be governed by the relevant Rules of the High Court stipulated in a Circular dated 23.03.1999.
Challenging the said order, the petitioner approached the High Court where he contended that the rejection was arbitrary and contrary to the principles laid down in an earlier decision involving a similarly-situated candidate (Kum P. Tulasi), wherein the benefit of appointment to a higher post was extended in terms of a Government Order of 1991. In that case, a Division Bench of the High Court had held that the dependents of deceased persons were eligible to be considered, for any category whose pay is equal or lower to that of Junior Assistant if the candidate meets the required qualifications and standards.
Against this backdrop, a Division Bench comprising Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Justice TCD Sekhar noted that the District Judge had wrongly relied on the 1999 Circular, instead of considering the provisions 1991 GO– which would have entitled the petitioner to be appointed as a Junior Assistant. In this regard, the Court held,
"A perusal of this Circular, dated 23.03.1999, would show that, the said Circular, relates to promotions for selection posts and non-selection posts. It is not clear as to how a Circular relating to promotions, would bar the appointment of a person, under the Compassionate Appointment Scheme, to the post of Junior Assistant, if such a person is otherwise eligible and has the necessary educational qualifications. In the present case, we do not find any reason to hold that the petitioner was not otherwise eligible or qualified to be appointed as a Junior Assistant.”
The Court thus allowed the petition and set aside the impugned order of rejection, further directing the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioner by treating his appointment from the date of rejection as a Junior Assistant and to give necessary promotions and time scale of pay. However, the Court cautioned that there would be no payment of back wages as the petitioner discharged his functions as an Attender and subsequent promotional posts and had been paid for such work.
Case Details:
Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO: 23473/2011
Case Title: PIDUGU SASI KANTH REDDY v. DIST JUDGE KADAPA and Ors